H2O Posted August 10, 2021 Share Posted August 10, 2021 Hi All, I've been working on a layout set in 1970's into early 80's for a fairly mainline station in the Bristol area in OO, various inspirations taken from; layouts on this wonderful forum, minories (of course!) and various books. I'm at the stage where I need to start laying track and am now procrastinating before I start cutting track... I'm limited for space, the layout will be set up on my shed work bench which is 2.8m x 0.6m and will need to be disassembled from time to time. The plan is for two boards, each 1.2m x 0.5m (about 4' x 1'7"). Assuming the track plan uploads ok... The red tracks are a 1.2m long removable traverser, orange tracks are access tracks to the traverser. Green tracks could be either a loco refuelling / maintenance or goods sidings (cement or oil). Points in the plan are the recent peco bullhead code 75. Stock to be 2 car DMUs into upper platform and possibly 3 car into the middle platforms or a semi static placement of a mainline loco and carriage. The lower platform to be parcels and the bottom tracks for access the 2 green sidings in front of the hidden traverser. Not decided on what these could be - engine refuelling or maintenance point or a goods / cement terminal? The future plan (assuming I find some more space!) is the lower plan with the tracks in blue on 2x 600mm boards added to make it a bit more minories like with perhaps an overall roof on the left side hiding the rest of the station - I'd probably need a longer traverser to make use of the longer platforms. Ultimately another fiddle yard could be added to the left hand end so a half station could operate with mainline trains poking onto the scene, loco detach and coaches disappear off to the left (or HST power car + 1 coach) appear and then disappear. I'm not sure if I'm squeezing too much in the given space or operation or expansion will be limited? Main aim is to get some modelling skills and ideas developed, somewhere to operate / display stock and just to run some trains up and down... Not sure if the green tracks are optimal - limited headshunt access if operated as goods yard. Also not sure if I'm boxing myself in and a small change now in the limited area I have would open up much better operation or expansion possibilities? The misalignment in the 2nd plan is because I've set the track spacing a bit narrower than standard. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted August 10, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 10, 2021 By the early 1970s you'd have to go a long way from Bristol TM to find another station with a parcels platform because road delivery areas were very large by then;- Taunton was the next one to the south west, Gloucester to the north, and Swindon to the east - so not over realistic to drop something into that mix. Having freight sidings is not a bad idea but by then traffic was limited largely to (station)/siding-to - station traffic which is handy because that means no need for a goods shed but you can still have a variety of traffics dealt with on a full wagonload basis - 2 sidings would be ideal for that sort of thing. Otherwise not a bad approach although, again by that time frame many WR intermediate/smaller size stations were down to just two platform faces - even Swindon only had two through platforms plus a very short bay at one end. What might work well is to get rid of the platform loop at the top of the plan but keep the one near the bottom and use it to turnround/reverse a DMU service which would add a bit of operating interest for such a simple track layout. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Flying Pig Posted August 10, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 10, 2021 Have you seen Westonmouth Central which has a lot in common with your ideas? Note the uneven split which gives rather more scenic length than in your plan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Chimer Posted August 11, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 11, 2021 Not what you asked about, but there's something wrong with your traverser design. For a conventional traverser, all the approach roads need to be parallel. For a sector plate, they all need to meet the arc of the plate's swing at right angles. You seem to have a bit of both ...... and in either case, you need to be sure the device can move far enough for all the storage roads to meet all the approach roads without running into walls or other baseboards (the green sidings look a bit close for comfort). You also seem to have splayed out the ends of the storage roads at the right-hand side (the way you would for a sector plate), which almost suggests you're thinking of a train turntable, but there's obviously no room for rotation. Meaning to be helpful .... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2O Posted August 11, 2021 Author Share Posted August 11, 2021 14 hours ago, Chimer said: Not what you asked about, but there's something wrong with your traverser design. For a conventional traverser, all the approach roads need to be parallel. For a sector plate, they all need to meet the arc of the plate's swing at right angles. You seem to have a bit of both ...... and in either case, you need to be sure the device can move far enough for all the storage roads to meet all the approach roads without running into walls or other baseboards (the green sidings look a bit close for comfort). You also seem to have splayed out the ends of the storage roads at the right-hand side (the way you would for a sector plate), which almost suggests you're thinking of a train turntable, but there's obviously no room for rotation. Meaning to be helpful .... Hi Chimer, No probs with your comments. I think I've misnamed the traverser (apologies), it is a sector plate with the rotating point at the far right hand side of the right hand board, so the yellow tracks curve 'in' and the red curve 'out'. The red curve out at both ends as the sector plate is removable and reversable. This will help with changing stock and also act as stock boxes to reduce handling. Thank you for the comment about all tracks being accessible to all lines, you are right that the green tracks mean this won't be possible for the plan shown. I was hoping that this wouldn't impact too much on operation if the stock and sequence was carefully organised... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Chimer Posted August 11, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 11, 2021 Ah, I didn't spot the second and fourth yellow tracks were curved ...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCB Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 I can't see the sector plate working. The angles between the fixed and moving tracks will only line up in one position. Really needs a traverser and the traverser needs almost twice the width of the moving deck in which to traverse. A cassette yard would probably be preferable. Medium size terminus stations were a shadow of their 1960s selves by the mid 1970s even if they actually stayed open, Four platforms was big by GWR Standards and Terminus stations with three or more platforms also were surprisingly rare. Penzance, Newquay, Weymouth, WSM ( Locking Road,) Cheltenham St James, Swansea, Fishguard, Birmingham (Moor Street) Aberystwyth? Windsor and Paddington spring to mind, may be some more Welsh ones Barry Island? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now